B35 via Church Posted June 21, 2012 Share #101 Posted June 21, 2012 Don't you think that you'd want trains with faster-closing doors on busier and more crowded lines, because dwell times are longer and more unpredictable? I was waiting for you to say something to this effect.... If faster closing doors on busier lines are good for those lines, then they'd be just as good on any other line for that same reason..... That's all I was getting at..... That simple point..... Which is why I implicitly said "Nothing significant"...... I won't go as far as to say retire the R46's, though.... Do you guys notice the same problems with the R46s on the ? That's exactly the line I was thinking of when I made that post.... There's quite a bit of door holding on the A (which is a separate problem in & of itself) which only magnifies the delays in pull out times, since the doors close as slow as they do..... again, I'm not assuming any drastic increase in service if R160's were to be put on the R.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSubwayStation Posted June 21, 2012 Share #102 Posted June 21, 2012 That's exactly the line I was thinking of when I made that post.... There's quite a bit of door holding on the A (which is a separate problem in & of itself) which only magnifies the delays in pull out times, since the doors close as slow as they do..... So, do you mean that on the R46s, there's a long delay between when the conductor pushes the button and when the doors actually close? Because if it's just that the doors move slowly, I consider that a negligible effect. again, I'm not assuming any drastic increase in service if R160's were to be put on the R.... I assume you mean service quality, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Threxx Posted June 21, 2012 Share #103 Posted June 21, 2012 If the R46's were swapped, and the got the 's R160's, would things run better? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSubwayStation Posted June 21, 2012 Share #104 Posted June 21, 2012 If the R46's were swapped, and the got the 's R160's, would things run better? I don't see why. The only reason why people have mentioned door issues on the is because that's where the R46s are. If the R46s went to the , then we'd be hearing about how the doors are so slow on the line. Besides, having older trains on a less-busy, part-time line is better than on the heavily used line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted June 21, 2012 Share #105 Posted June 21, 2012 So, do you mean that on the R46s, there's a long delay between when the conductor pushes the button and when the doors actually close? Because if it's just that the doors move slowly, I consider that a negligible effect. I assume you mean service quality, right? - The latter (just the doors moving slowly)..... and I don't consider it as negligible an affect than you might, esp. considering the number of stations the R serves..... - yeah, service quality..... I don't see why. The only reason why people have mentioned door issues on the is because that's where the R46s are. If the R46s went to the , then we'd be hearing about how the doors are so slow on the line. Not out of me, you wouldn't.... b/c the E isn't nowhere near as slow a line as the R..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted June 21, 2012 Author Share #106 Posted June 21, 2012 Do you guys notice the same problems with the R46s on the ? I would say yes. The difference with the is that it is express so the door issue doesn't become as magnified. I used the Monday and Tuesday evening to go to a tutoring session up in Washington Heights and it seemed like the commute was pretty quick, but I still felt like if the doors were faster it would've been even faster. I wouldn't be surprised if the door issue wasn't one reason why the runs so crappy as in delayed. Well, that ain't happening soon. They've got more life left in them, whether or not they feel old or have slow-closing doors. Never say never... Who knows... Maybe they'll find structural problems with these cars too... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted June 21, 2012 Author Share #107 Posted June 21, 2012 Not out of me, you wouldn't.... b/c the E isn't nowhere near as slow a line as the R..... The is much quicker than the , but with the crowding on the , those R46s would certainly slow things down with folks holding the doors or trying to get on before the doors closed. Slow moving doors just makes more people try to get on the train before the doors fully close... Of course this wouldn't be an issue if folks had an ounce of patience. You mentioned schedules being unnecessary for trains, but they come in handy if the train arrives packed and you want to know when the next one is due. Worked for me quite well the other night. Instead of packing into a sardine filled train at 59th, I just checked the schedule, saw that another was due to pull in right behind that which was late, and violà... Basically got on a half empty train. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NX Express Posted June 21, 2012 Share #108 Posted June 21, 2012 That works, except for the fact that (on the B Division lines except the ) there's no guarantee that the next train will arrive on schedule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted June 21, 2012 Author Share #109 Posted June 21, 2012 That works, except for the fact that (on the B Division lines except the ) there's no guarantee that the next train will arrive on schedule. Well yes of course. It was a gamble even with the , but at that time with trains running every 5 minutes, I knew another one would be there soon. Speaking of the , that's another line that could use better weekend frequencies. I once got caught at Columbus Circle in a hurry to get to tutoring session one Saturday and I waited 20 minutes for a friggin' train. Then just as I gave up and jumped on the the pulls in while the doors on the train was closing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NX Express Posted June 21, 2012 Share #110 Posted June 21, 2012 Waiting 20 minutes for an every-5-minutes train has nothing to do with frequency. Increasing frequency might even make delays worse, since there would be more trains involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Threxx Posted June 21, 2012 Share #111 Posted June 21, 2012 Well yes of course. It was a gamble even with the , but at that time with trains running every 5 minutes, I knew another one would be there soon. Speaking of the , that's another line that could use better weekend frequencies. I once got caught at Columbus Circle in a hurry to get to tutoring session one Saturday and I waited 20 minutes for a friggin' train. Then just as I gave up and jumped on the the pulls in while the doors on the train was closing. Again, it's not a matter of frequencies, it's a matter of bunching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSubwayStation Posted June 21, 2012 Share #112 Posted June 21, 2012 Speed calculations to the rescue! R46 doors closing: 2 Seconds R160 doors closing: 2 Seconds Well, I don't know what to tell you guys...This problem with the R46 doors is definitely not that the doors themselves move slowly. Now, maybe VG8 is right, that there's a delay between when the conductor pushes the button to when the doors close. I wouldn't be surprised if the door issue wasn't one reason why the runs so crappy as in delayed. The has the same delays that the has, and it doesn't run R46s of course. The is the longest route in the system, along with the , and that leads to bunching problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted June 21, 2012 Share #113 Posted June 21, 2012 The is much quicker than the , but with the crowding on the , those R46s would certainly slow things down with folks holding the doors or trying to get on before the doors closed. Slow moving doors just makes more people try to get on the train before the doors fully close... Of course this wouldn't be an issue if folks had an ounce of patience. I'm not sure why you're pointing this out to me.... I was addressing the notion that The SubwayStation mentioned, regarding bringing up a line just b/c R46's are on em (w/ the slow door opening/closing the both of us brought up)..... You mentioned schedules being unnecessary for trains, but they come in handy if the train arrives packed and you want to know when the next one is due. Worked for me quite well the other night. Instead of packing into a sardine filled train at 59th, I just checked the schedule, saw that another was due to pull in right behind that which was late, and violà... Basically got on a half empty train. Rather unrelated to the immediate topic at hand, but okay.... Carrying/seeking a paper schedule for a subway line, yeah I do think that's unnecessary..... I personally don't care at what particular time a subway is set to arrive at any station..... I'm not that anal regarding arrival times on our subways.... If the contrary works for you, then more power to you.... what else is there to say..... Speed calculations to the rescue! R46 doors closing: 2 Seconds R160 doors closing: 2 Seconds Well, I don't know what to tell you guys...This problem with the R46 doors is definitely not that the doors themselves move slowly. Now, maybe VG8 is right, that there's a delay between when the conductor pushes the button to when the doors close. All I know is that the slow opening & closing of the doors to me, is more apparent/noticable on the R (R46's) than on the Q (R160's).... The R is a slow line, and I still think the slow door opening/closing at each & every station is a factor (a large factor, no.... but still a factor) as to why it is such..... I aint gettin into when the c/r pushes the buttons or any of that.... I have no way of knowing what the c/r is doing when he/she's doing it, to even attempt to criticize him/her on that..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted June 21, 2012 Author Share #114 Posted June 21, 2012 Waiting 20 minutes for an every-5-minutes train has nothing to do with frequency. Increasing frequency might even make delays worse, since there would be more trains involved. You're confused. These were two separate incidents; one during rush hour on Tuesday and the other being a Saturday. In any event, I still don't understand why the line is so delay prone... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSubwayStation Posted June 21, 2012 Share #115 Posted June 21, 2012 You're confused. These were two separate incidents; one during rush hour on Tuesday and the other being a Saturday. In any event, I still don't understand why the line is so delay prone... Well, the lines with the most delays, I'm pretty sure, (,,,,), are all the longest lines. Crowding affects this too. Maybe you've been particularly unlucky with the , but statistically it's not the most delayed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted June 21, 2012 Author Share #116 Posted June 21, 2012 I'm not sure why you're pointing this out to me.... I was addressing the notion that The SubwayStation mentioned, regarding bringing up a line just b/c R46's are on em (w/ the slow door opening/closing the both of us brought up)..... Well I don't see how you could say that you wouldn't complain if R46's were on the when it seems evident that they would be delayed with all of the people I see trying to get on those trains at the last minute. The constant opening and closing of the doors would be even worse if R46s were on the , causing the line to be delay prone. I mention this because you say the is relatively fast, which I agree with. Rather unrelated to the immediate topic at hand, but okay.... Carrying/seeking a paper schedule for a subway line, yeah I do think that's unnecessary..... I personally don't care at what particular time a subway is set to arrive at any station..... I'm not that anal regarding arrival times on our subways.... If the contrary works for you, then more power to you.... what else is there to say..... Nah, no paper schedule... Had it on my phone... Paper schedule would be ridiculous and to be honest, it wasn't until recently that I even knew subway schedules existed! I would show up and say okay a train will be here soon and that was that. What I found was that on some lines the old show up and a train will come quickly doesn't always apply. I'm sorry but they may say that "X" train runs every 10 minutes, but on some lines that is not the case, so for lines like the (B)/(D), it seems like it isn't such a terrible idea to try and time them because I always wait an eternity (seems like 20 minutes) for one bloody train. It's like I always seem to just miss one an then the next one takes forever, so I tried timing them as an experiment to get me moving faster and it has worked pretty well. Anything that saves me time is a good thing IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSubwayStation Posted June 21, 2012 Share #117 Posted June 21, 2012 Via Garibaldi 8, is there any subway line that you believe has good service? You say that the is crowded, the is delayed, the are crowded and delayed, and the and never show up. When you bring up problems on specific lines, e.g. needing more service, it's hard for me to take it seriously because it seems like you think that the whole system is messed up. BTW, I still would like to hear what you guys think of my speed calculations on the R46 doors, and what actually makes them slow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted June 21, 2012 Author Share #118 Posted June 21, 2012 Via Garibaldi 8, is there any subway line that you believe has good service? You say that the is crowded, the is delayed, the are crowded and delayed, and the and never show up. When you bring up problems on specific lines, e.g. needing more service, it's hard for me to take it seriously because it seems like you think that the whole system is messed up. Quite frankly the isn't bad, but it isn't what it used to be either. Service used to be more frequent, but I believe cuts were made. For what it's worth, no, suwbay service isn't good overall, especially when you consider that even the admits that trains are becoming more and more delay prone and trips are taking longer, so it isn't just my imagination or like I love complaining. When you consider how ridership is increasing, I'd say subway service isn't matching the demand and what I mean is demand by way of reliable, speedy service. Now MetroNorth on the other hand. I can almost set my phone to when I leave from Spuyten Duyvil to my arrival at Grand Central. This morning we were 3 minutes late arriving because we had to wait for a place for the train to pull into, but usually it is right on time. Then again it is also $7.50 for a single Peak ticket, not including the $2.25 for the Hudson Rail Link shuttle, but I'm just wondering what we would have to pay to get truly good subway service... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Threxx Posted June 21, 2012 Share #119 Posted June 21, 2012 Quite frankly the isn't bad, but it isn't what it used to be either. Service used to be more frequent, but I believe cuts were made. For what it's worth, no, suwbay service isn't good overall, especially when you consider that even the admits that trains are becoming more and more delay prone and trips are taking longer, so it isn't just my imagination or like I love complaining. When you consider how ridership is increasing, I'd say subway service isn't matching the demand. Are you sure about that? *coughBxM18stopissuecough* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted June 21, 2012 Share #120 Posted June 21, 2012 Well I don't see how you could say that you wouldn't complain if R46's were on the when it seems evident that they would be delayed with all of the people I see trying to get on those trains at the last minute. The constant opening and closing of the doors would be even worse if R46s were on the , causing the line to be delay prone. I mention this because you say the is relatively fast, which I agree with. It wouldn't be as problematic on the E than on the R.... the R has to cover a longer distance w/ no express portion on top of it, meaning more stops..... Not denying there are loads of people trying to get on the E...... Not denying there would be NO problem if the R46's were on the E...... You are reading into things too much.... Nah, no paper schedule... Had it on my phone... Paper schedule would be ridiculous and to be honest, it wasn't until recently that I even knew subway schedules existed! I would show up and say okay a train will be here soon and that was that. What I found was that on some lines the old show up and a train will come quickly doesn't always apply. I'm sorry but they may say that "X" train runs every 10 minutes, but on some lines that is not the case, so for lines like the (B)/(D), it seems like it isn't such a terrible idea to try and time them because I always wait an eternity (seems like 20 minutes) for one bloody train. It's like I always seem to just miss one an then the next one takes forever, so I tried timing them as an experiment to get me moving faster and it has worked pretty well. Anything that saves me time is a good thing IMO. fine, looking at the schedule while on your phone.... same general idea.... If it's not during the early morning hours (which I don't ride the subway all that often during those times anyway), I don't worry about having to wait 20 mins or w/e for a train during the other portions of the day.... I'm well aware that stated headways aren't exact (which is one reason why I don't bother with carrying/looking at a subway schedule in any capacity)..... I don't have near as bad timing as you're illustrating you have upon catching the subway, so I don't worry about penny pinching for minutes by checking out a schedule for em..... Different strokes for different folks..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSubwayStation Posted June 21, 2012 Share #121 Posted June 21, 2012 Quite frankly the isn't bad, but it isn't what it used to be either. Service used to be more frequent, but I believe cuts were made. For what it's worth, no, suwbay service isn't good overall, especially when you consider that even the admits that trains are becoming more and more delay prone and trips are taking longer, so it isn't just my imagination or like I love complaining. When you consider how ridership is increasing, I'd say subway service isn't matching the demand and what I mean is demand by way of reliable, speedy service. Now MetroNorth on the other hand. I can almost set my phone to when I leave from Spuyten Duyvil to my arrival at Grand Central. This morning we were 3 minutes late arriving because we had to wait for a place for the train to pull into, but usually it is right on time. Then again it is also $7.50 for a single Peak ticket, not including the $2.25 for the Hudson Rail Link shuttle, but I'm just wondering what we would have to pay to get truly good subway service... 1.) Doesn't MetroNorth come less frequently (and get less crowded), so delays won't build up? It's pretty well understood that commuter railroads and rapid transit are different. Commuter railroads emphasize schedule, and subways emphasize frequency. 2.) Do you think that simply making trains more frequent will fix the subway's problems? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted June 21, 2012 Share #122 Posted June 21, 2012 Do you think that simply making trains more frequent will fix the subway's problems? That is exactly what I was trying to illustrate to him w/ beefing up service on the L on the weekends..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted June 21, 2012 Author Share #123 Posted June 21, 2012 1.) Doesn't MetroNorth come less frequently (and get less crowded), so delays won't build up? It's pretty well understood that commuter railroads and rapid transit are different. Commuter railroads emphasize schedule, and subways emphasize frequency. 2.) Do you think that simply making trains more frequent will fix the subway's problems? Actually MetroNorth is becoming more crowded all the time, yet still performing quite well. Nevertheless, frequencies are not everything. Even if a line is frequent, if it is delay prone, customers will not reap the benefits of the increased service. There are various problems with the subways, not just one fix. In SOME instances, yes frequencies should be increased. In other instances, perhaps different cars could be used or more infrastructure improvements are needed. Quite frankly, I believe that the latter is the biggest issue, hence why I support stations being shut down to allow work to be done quicker and thoroughly the way it is done elsewhere. The piece meal idea that the uses is getting old. They've got to come up with something better. The end result is wasted money to keep fixing up stations that weren't done right the first time, more delayed trains because of these repairs and the cycle goes on and on. The other issue is that the needs to step up and crack down on the folks checking the signals. How many reports are going to come out about inspectors falsifying signal inspections?? Seems like more and more trains are becoming delayed particularly because of signal malfunctions. That is exactly what I was trying to illustrate to him w/ beefing up service on the L on the weekends..... Yes and I also said that alternatives are needed with the . The should not be the only show in town. They could provide express bus service for those willing to pay for it and market it to take some of the stress off of the line. In addition to that they should also be pushing the ferry service more as well that now runs to and from Williamsburg to the city. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
checkmatechamp13 Posted June 21, 2012 Share #124 Posted June 21, 2012 I don't see the point in bringing a schedule, especially with these subway countdown clocks. I mean, looking at the schedule isn't going to make the train come any sooner. If you're in a hurry, I could kind of see the point in carrying the schedule to time yourself for the train, but even then, unless the train is super-reliable while still being (relatively) infrequent, I don't see the point (By relatively infrequent, I mean it runs every 8-12 minutes or something, where you can actually figure out which train you caught, instead of wondering whether it was 2 minutes late or 2 minutes early). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted June 21, 2012 Author Share #125 Posted June 21, 2012 I don't see the point in bringing a schedule, especially with these subway countdown clocks. I mean, looking at the schedule isn't going to make the train come any sooner. If you're in a hurry, I could kind of see the point in carrying the schedule to time yourself for the train, but even then, unless the train is super-reliable while still being (relatively) infrequent, I don't see the point (By relatively infrequent, I mean it runs every 8-12 minutes or something, where you can actually figure out which train you caught, instead of wondering whether it was 2 minutes late or 2 minutes early). I see the point because not all stations have countdown clocks #1 and #2, like I said, some trains supposedly come every 10 minutes, yet they seem to really run every 20 in some instances, so timing certain lines IS a good thing since if you know that a train is running every 20 minutes you can consider backups rather than waiting there like a fool wasting time. Now a line like the or ... Of course I just walk to Grand Central and wait because the service is pretty frequent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.